[Shish2k]

> It's non-zero. Does it matter by how much?

Literally everything you do carries a non-zero risk of death, being 100% safe is impossible. Given that every day is a gamble, knowing your risk and reward ratios is important for deciding which activities to do and which to stay away from.

In this specific case, if dedicating your whole life to privacy reduces your odds of identity theft from 2% to 1%, I think a lot of people would say "I'll spend my life having fun and accept the higher risk"; if a tiny lifestyle change could reduce the odds from 20% to 1%, the outcome would probably be different.

[zAy0LfpBZLC8mAC]

Which is kinda besides the point? The question isn't whether you as an individual should dedicate your life to having privacy for yourself, but whether we as a society should make privacy a norm.

If everyone shits in the streets, the question isn't whether you should dedicate your life to avoiding all the shit to reduce your risk of infection, the question is whether society should stop shitting in the streets, because that's actually not much effort, while massively improving the health of everyone.

[Shish2k]

I made my statement about an individual because OP seemed to be asking as an individual, but it still applies perfectly to society; you can pretty much search and replace on the text:

"In this specific case, if society making privacy a top priority at the expense of everything else reduces everybody's odds of identity theft from 2% to 1%, I think a lot of people would say "I'd rather society priorotised having fun and accept the higher risk to society"; if a tiny lifestyle change across society could reduce the odds from 20% to 1%, the outcome would probably be different."

The point remains the same: you can't make sensible decisions without knowing the odds; avoiding all activities with non-zero risk means avoiding all activities, and that's why it matters how much.